[arin-ppml] Revisit RPKI TAL Relying Party Agreement?

[William Herrin]

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:13 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> On 3 Feb 2017, at 10:47 AM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> Is ARIN the right place for an RPKI registry? They seem... reluctant.
> ARIN is actually quite active in development, promotion, and support
> of RPKI services – please do not confuse having appropriate legal
> agreements with level of enthusiasm...

John,

There's nothing more dangerous to an effort than a bureaucrat's
enthusiasm. Out in the real world, "Best efforts. AS IS," is more
often than not the appropriate legal agreement. It's a contract that
allows work to get done.


>> It's not just the data for relying parties; they won't publish RPKI
>> information for the legacy registrants without those registrants first
>> entering contractual relationships unrelated to RPKI.
>
> As you are aware, we provide legacy resource holders the same registry
> services (including ability to update Whois contact info, reverse DNS, etc.)
> that they received at ARIN’s formation, and that is done no charge and with
> no  requirement for any agreement.

Exactly. You refuse to provide new services related to legacy resource
holdings, including RPKI. While not unreasonable in the context of
ARIN operations, this is harmful to the RPKI efforts. This is
something no organization prioritizing RPKI would do. Since offering
new services like RPKI to legacy registrants* appears inimical to
ARIN's core mission I respectfully question whether ARIN can be a
satisfactory steward for RPKI.

I've been watching this for a couple years now John. What you're doing
with RPKI isn't working.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


* without explicitly signing a registration services agreement
contract with far broader implications for the resource than what is
tied to the new service.


-- 
William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>